Hannes Lagerlöf
Biographic Data
| ID | 3731310 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Hannes Lagerlöf |
| GIVEN NAMES | Hannes |
| FAMILY NAME | Lagerlöf |
| SIGNATURE | LAGERLÖF H |
| AFFILIATIONS | University of Gothenburg |
| VERIFIED | No |
| TOTAL WORKS | 4 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 1 |
| WORKS AS AUTHOR | 4 |
| WORKS AS EDITOR | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2022 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2023 |
| H-INDEX | 1 |
Aligning subjective and objective ‘truth’ in nuclear waste management
To site repositories for spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste, nuclear waste management (NWM) actors need public support. In the past, NWM actors have tried to build public support by conveying what they believe are the ‘objective facts’ of repository technologies, hence countering public prejudices and fears on the subject. Thus, while the public has been represented as emotional by implementers, implementers have portrayed themselves as guid…
Swedish nuclear waste management as an inert controversy
Science and technology studies (STS) has long studied scientific controversies as a way to identify prospects for technical democracy. Contemporary STS tends to prioritize ‘overflowing’ controversies, where lay actors challenge experts’ technical frameworks by explicating the broader implications and so open up technological issues. Yet many controversies are not like this; they operate on a largely technical register within official procedures, …
Consenting publics
Research on nuclear repository siting often suggests that the dominance of key actors in siting processes should be counterbalanced by greater inclusion of disadvantaged local publics. Often, public consent is represented as guarantee of ‘fairness’. I problematize this notion by showing how consent is pursued by the implementer in Sweden. I invoke industry’s written material distributed to citizens in the repository candidate community of Östhamm…
Striving for technical consensus by agreeing to disagree
Socio-technical arrangements seeking to produce consensus are understood differently by theories in science and technology studies. Some scholars argue that consensus ambitions are coercive in that they oppress the (inevitable) alternatives to the dominant values and interests that are enforced under a guise of consensual unity. Others argue that consensus is inherently characterized by value and interest heterogeneity, i.e. downplaying processes…
Striving for technical consensus by agreeing to disagree
Socio-technical arrangements seeking to produce consensus are understood differently by theories in science and technology studies. Some scholars argue that consensus ambitions are coercive in that they oppress the (inevitable) alternatives to the dominant values and interests that are enforced under a guise of consensual unity. Others argue that consensus is inherently characterized by value and interest heterogeneity, i.e. downplaying processes…
Striving for technical consensus by agreeing to disagree
Socio-technical arrangements seeking to produce consensus are understood differently by theories in science and technology studies. Some scholars argue that consensus ambitions are coercive in that they oppress the (inevitable) alternatives to the dominant values and interests that are enforced under a guise of consensual unity. Others argue that consensus is inherently characterized by value and interest heterogeneity, i.e. downplaying processes…
Aligning subjective and objective ‘truth’ in nuclear waste management
To site repositories for spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste, nuclear waste management (NWM) actors need public support. In the past, NWM actors have tried to build public support by conveying what they believe are the ‘objective facts’ of repository technologies, hence countering public prejudices and fears on the subject. Thus, while the public has been represented as emotional by implementers, implementers have portrayed themselves as guid…
Swedish nuclear waste management as an inert controversy
Science and technology studies (STS) has long studied scientific controversies as a way to identify prospects for technical democracy. Contemporary STS tends to prioritize ‘overflowing’ controversies, where lay actors challenge experts’ technical frameworks by explicating the broader implications and so open up technological issues. Yet many controversies are not like this; they operate on a largely technical register within official procedures, …
Consenting publics
Research on nuclear repository siting often suggests that the dominance of key actors in siting processes should be counterbalanced by greater inclusion of disadvantaged local publics. Often, public consent is represented as guarantee of ‘fairness’. I problematize this notion by showing how consent is pursued by the implementer in Sweden. I invoke industry’s written material distributed to citizens in the repository candidate community of Östhamm…
Risk Perception and Management (4 works) · Law (3 works) · Political science (3 works) · Politics (3 works) · Sociology (3 works) · Engineering (2 works) · Law (2 works) · Public relations (2 works) · Ambiguity (1 work) · Artificial Intelligence (1 work)